More precisely:
The Tasks of the Proletarian Revolution in Relation to the State.
Marx and Engels on the State and the Tasks of Revolution in the Political Sphere (in its relation to the state).

One passage in *The Civil War* deserves particular attention. This passage has been cited, among other things, in the last preface to the *Communist Manifesto*, signed by both authors. This preface is dated London, 24. VI. 1872 (Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels). It states that the program of the *Communist Manifesto* has "in places become obsolete" (*Communist Manifesto*, 7th edition, Berlin, 190[5], p. 17120; with preface by Kautsky—vulgar!—and by both authors, 24. VI. 1872, Engels 28. VI. 1883 and 1. V. 1890, with a quotation from the preface to the Russian translation, concerning the Russian commune, London 21. I. 1882, where it now states "Russia represents the vanguard of the revolutionary movement in Europe," p. 20121).
Thus!!!

In what respects has the program "become obsolete"? The authors answer: (((see below, p. 27*)))
* See present volume, p. 211. Ed.
128
V. I. LENIN

"Namentlich hat die Kommune den Beweis geliefert, daß «die
Arbeiterklasse nicht die fertige Staatsmaschine in the 1876 edition:|
Staatsmaschinerie
einfach in Besitz nehmen und sie in the 1876 edition: diese|
fur ihre eigenen Zwecke in Bewegung setzen kann»" (*The Civil War in France*, p. 19). (Ed. 1876, p. 23, beginning of Chapter III.)

This passage, taken in isolation, is unclear; it leaves as if a loophole for opportunism, giving, at first glance, the possibility of interpreting it in the sense that, they say, one "simply" cannot take the "ready" "state machine" "into" one's "hands" (in Besitz)—which means... there is no need for revolutions, be more cautious about them, pay more attention to the idea not of seizing power, but of slow development, gradual growth, etc. and so forth. (See Bernstein. "Voraussetzungen." Stuttgart, 1899, p. VI [and p. 18, p. 134], where this passage is placed alongside Engels's preface of 1895 and interpreted as a renunciation of revolution!!! Bernstein cites this passage three times in his book.)*

Such an interpretation (it seems, I have encountered it somewhere, though I cannot recall where exactly) is utterly false. In reality, Marx means something quite the opposite: the proletarian revolution cannot "simply" take the "ready" state machine into its hands; the revolution must smash it, this ready machine, and replace it with a new one. Here is a particularly vivid and decisive passage: